The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)

Saturday, July 17, 2010

He'll probably remember that "CLICK!" the rest of life.

Thanks to JW Rawles at SurvivalBlog.com for posting this link and video. The cop owes his life to the expended round in the first cylinder.

The email bringing it to Rawles attention is entitled "Observations on a Gunfight in Montana."

Jim:

Take a look at a one-minute a video of a routine nighttime DUI stop in Hamilton, Montana that turned ugly. Listen for the first “click” as the suspect attempts to fire his .41 Magnum revolver about two inches from the officer’s nose. The “click” is the hammer dropping on an expended round in the cylinder. The second round was live, but Officer Jessop had by then recovered and made a strategic move to the rear of the vehicle, buying more time and a much more advantageous position for a firefight. He tossed his flashlight so he could use both hands for better gun control, and opened fire on the suspect as he sped away. His aim looked very controlled, and was obviously very much in the ballpark. The suspect was hit at least once, crashed into a power pole, and was declared dead at the scene. Don’t know what the officer was carrying, but he fired 14 rounds in return and they were bigger than a 9mm. Probably Glock .40s. And then he casually picked his flashlight up as he was returning to his car and notifying dispatch. While you can always Monday morning quarterback someone’s technique, how many of us would have done this well under these circumstances? All things considered, this officer did the basics, did them fast, and did them well. I’d ride with him anytime.

Final score: Officer Ross Jessop, 1; Raymond Thane Davis, 0

A jury ruled on April 13, 2010 that Hamilton Police Officer Ross Jessop was justified in shooting Raymond Thane Davis.

The oft-quoted Sun Tzu recognized the value of training centuries ago when he wrote: "Victorious warriors win first, and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first, and then seek to win."

Learning to win occurs in training.

JWR Replies: Thanks for sharing that video link. I have just one observation. Did you see the officer reload? From what I saw, he re-holstered a pistol that had been shot dry. But, all in all, I'd say that he did well, given the extremely stressful circumstances.

12 comments:

Anonymous
said...

nice guardian of the Constitution pulls guy over for no probable cause and incompetent freedom lover makes himself dead. Pig shot as person was attempting to flee and no longer an imminent peril justified shooting unless you are a government goon "Only Ones " with the right to violate anyone for no reason needed.And you so called Constitutionalist Freedom Lovers really Love your Communist Bondage and lick their Boots,Buddy........see pigscum in action at injustice everywhere.com if you can stomach a bit of Truth.

Actually, I DON'T. **ONLY** an "only one" is allowed to shoot at a fleeing suspect. We "normals" are supposed to be able to turn off our fight-or-flight instincts and let him go if he wants -- even if he started the altercation by trying to shoot us in the face from 2" away.

The highly-trained "only ones" on the other hand are entitled to keep shooting until their mags are empty, even if at an unarmed man.

Now that we've got **THAT** straight...

The linked article shows that his initial report said nothing of a shooting - only attempted theft - which is frankly STUPID.

NEVER talk to police without your lawyer, NEVER make a statement without your lawyer, NEVER lie to the cops -- which should be easy since if you're not speaking, you can't be lying ...

NEVER, NEVER NEVER.

**NEVER**!!

REMEMBER: We live in a POLICE STATE. They are **NOT** your friend, no matter how much they may pretend. If they can lock YOU up along with the real miscreants, well that's a "two-fer" and a **VERY** good day -- for them, anyway!

Had this guy followed this basic rule -- NEVER TALK TO POLICE -- he'd likely not be having these problems now.

Yes, I hate to see the real criminals walk, but the "victim" here is **MOSTLY** a victim of his own stupidity.

I've got no problem with the law. The driver gets pulled over for a DUI and tries to kill a cop. There is nothing justifiable about that. My only problem is the shooting after the cop is no longer in danger. But, when looking at the events that would have followed had the officer not fired, I would say this happened the best possible way given the senario. A high speed chase, this guy being drunk, and shooting... I'd say this was a justifiable shooting for sure. To make the claim that he wouldn't have been a further danger to society after pulling away doesn't make sense.

Notice how the dash cam failed to "malfunction" though. Funny how they only do that when the legitimacy is in question. Lol. All in all though, I'd say this officer did a good job. I hope he's an oathkeeper!

I looked him up, said he had a long violent criminal history and had just returned to the valley after a long absence. I'm guessing that was prison.

One commenter adds in:If you do a little research, you'll find that Davis was seeking revenge that night, and had it not been for officer Jessop, that night most likely would have gone a lot different. Davis had told a friend earlier "it's been nice knowing you, you won't be seeing me for a long time" and revealed to the friend that he was carrying a gun. Davis had already decided he was going to use the gun that night and by the grace of God it wasn't Officer Jessop who was killed. I'm sorry Davis chose that route that night, but I thank God that a law enforcement officer who was doing his job, got to go home that night. So many times it goes the other way. Officer Jessop most likely saved the lives of one or more people that night.

I personally don't have anything against what the officer did and if somebody had tried to shoot me like that I'd likely do a mag dump into them as well.

He sounds intoxicated on the recording, the camera got a good picture of the truck and everything that happened. Even if he had managed to shoot the officer, I've got ZERO idea how he expected to get away with it. He'd been stopped previously in the evening for an investigation of criminal mischief and the local police KNEW HIS TRUCK. Looks like he was out to commit some homicides and suicide by cop, but he only managed to get the last part of it accomplished.

Mechanic in Texas shot a fleeing person who had broken into his GF's truck DRT. He was no-billed. So I wouldn't say there's always a double standard as a friend of mine is a local Deputy who had to shoot a crackhead that was trying to kill him and he had as many legal hassles, if not more, than the mechanic that got no-billed. Same county.

I wouldn't say there is a blanket double standard on only ones vs citizens in shooting fleeing people, but Texas has pretty good laws in that regard.

As much as I don't like police and their misdeeds, I just don't see the fault in this. Maybe I'm wrong. Some of you are coming hard out against this. I see that. But I think this was justified because of the further threat this person would have been to others as the police tried to apprehend him.

Know which way your revolver's cylinder turns. It could save your life. The actions of police in places as disparate as New Orleans, Daytona and Oakland CA lead to distrust and actual disgust and hatred of LEOs. It doesn't come out of nowhere.

Essentially, I agree with EMWONAY; I think this was a righteous shooting; my only problem is that shootings like it should be righteous for non-badged shooters as well.

And I also concur with our host that the officer involved did well under the circumstances. But he was not perfect, given that he couldn't guarantee his backstop in the dark. I just want the same benefit of the doubt extended to the non-badged. (And frankly, even if a bystander had been hit, I'd want the blame to accrue to the original offender, not the defender.)

And let me make it clear: I'm glad this cop was on the streets that night, and that he pulled the drunk over. I'm not a fan of running blockades or pulling people over for no reason just to give them a breath test, but it's pretty clear that that guy was going to be causing trouble for somebody sooner or later. If he was willing to pull a gun on a cop during a routine traffic stop, who else would he have drawn on?

From a comment at the link:"Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)The Use of Force to Prevent the Escape of a Dangerous Suspect. 1) Officer must have probable cause (pc) to believe the fleeing suspect is dangerous, that is, posing a threat of death/serious physical harm to someone (someone being him/others, which is quite evident). 2) The use of deadly force must be necessary to affect the seizure."

Compare Peel: "The police are the people and the people are the police."

When any citizen is attacked, put in fear of his life, that citizen in my mind immediately acquires police powers necessary to apprehend or stop the perpetrator. Not to hunt him down for revenge; that would indeed be "vigilantism".But to halt an imminent threat to the community.

That said: One thing that's not a double standard: Officer Jessup was acquitted by a jury rather than being returned to duty from two weeks of paid administrative leave after being cleared by an internal investigation. That is as it should be, too. I want to see both things be more common: Cops going on trial for shootings, and defense shooters, badged or unbadged, being acquitted.

For clarity, my previous post referred to the article linked by "DJMoore."

As to the vid - which I've discusses ad-nauseum elsewhere - I still can't figure out how the miscreant managed to burn 2 rounds earlier in the evening and reset his revolver so the 2 dead chambers were the ones next under the hammer.

This cop should thank G*d for every day of his life.

Though I have plenty of objections to the blatant hassling usually excused by "traffic enforcement" I'm glad this scumbag is dead.

"Progress made under the shadow of the policeman's club is false progress."

I believe that liberty is the only genuinely valuable thing that men have invented, at least in the field of government, in a thousand years. I believe that it is better to be free than to be not free, even when the former is dangerous and the latter safe. I believe that the finest qualities of man can flourish only in free air – that progress made under the shadow of the policeman's club is false progress, and of no permanent value. I believe that any man who takes the liberty of another into his keeping is bound to become a tyrant, and that any man who yields up his liberty, in however slight the measure, is bound to become a slave. -- H.L. Mencken

On the efficacy of passive resistance in the face of the collectivist beast. . .

Had the Japanese got as far as India, Gandhi's theories of "passive resistance" would have floated down the Ganges River with his bayoneted, beheaded carcass. -- Mike Vanderboegh.

In the future . . .

When the histories are written, “National Rifle Association” will be cross-referenced with “Judenrat.” -- Mike Vanderboegh to Sebastian at "Snowflakes in Hell"

"Smash the bloody mirror."

If you find yourself through the looking glass, where the verities of the world you knew and loved no longer apply, there is only one thing to do. Knock the Red Queen on her ass, turn around, and smash the bloody mirror. -- Mike Vanderboegh

From Kurt Hoffman over at Armed and Safe.

"I believe that being despised by the despicable is as good as being admired by the admirable."

From long experience myself, I can only say, "You betcha."

"Only cowards dare cringe."

The fears of man are many. He fears the shadow of death and the closed doors of the future. He is afraid for his friends and for his sons and of the specter of tomorrow. All his life's journey he walks in the lonely corridors of his controlled fears, if he is a man. For only fools will strut, and only cowards dare cringe. -- James Warner Bellah, "Spanish Man's Grave" in Reveille, Curtis Publishing, 1947.

"We fight an enemy that never sleeps."

"As our enemies work bit by bit to deconstruct, we must work bit by bit to REconstruct. Be mindful where we should be. Set goals. We fight an enemy that never sleeps. We must learn to sleep less." -- Mike H. at What McAuliffe Said

"The Fate of Unborn Millions. . ."

"The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army-Our cruel and unrelenting Enemy leaves us no choice but a brave resistance, or the most abject submission; that is all we can expect-We have therefore to resolve to conquer or die." -- George Washington to his troops before the Battle of Long Island.

"We will not go gently . . ."

This is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can't be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won't be done. The Founders' Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost.

But I tell you this: We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.

And when we are gone, the scattered, free survivors hiding in the ruins of our once-great republic will sing of our deeds in forbidden songs, tending the flickering flame of individual liberty until it bursts forth again, as it must, generations later. We will live forever, like the Spartans at Thermopylae, in sacred memory.

-- Mike Vanderboegh, The Lessons of Mumbai:Death Cults, the "Socialism of Imbeciles" and Refusing to Submit, 1 December 2008

"A common language of resistance . . ."

"Colonial rebellions throughout the modern world have been acts of shared political imagination. Unless unhappy people develop the capacity to trust other unhappy people, protest remains a local affair easily silenced by traditional authority. Usually, however, a moment arrives when large numbers of men and women realize for the first time that they enjoy the support of strangers, ordinary people much like themselves who happen to live in distant places and whom under normal circumstances they would never meet. It is an intoxicating discovery. A common language of resistance suddenly opens to those who are most vulnerable to painful retribution the possibility of creating a new community. As the conviction of solidarity grows, parochial issues and aspirations merge imperceptibly with a compelling national agenda which only a short time before may have been the dream of only a few. For many Americans colonists this moment occurred late in the spring of 1774." -- T.H. Breen, The Marketplace of Revolution: How Consumer Politics Shaped American Independence, Oxford University Press, 2004, p.1.